trying to save for a new lens

[lynx0069]

currently i have the 18-55IS kit lens, 28-135 zoom and just recently bought a 70-200 f/4L lens to go with my XSi. i am trying to decide what lens to save up for and any recomendations are appreciated. the 28-135 is the lens that i keep on my rebel about 80% of the time, its a good walk around lens,but i miss having the wide angle(due to the crop factor). i am split between the efs 10-22 and the 17-40 L. i dont forsee myself stepping up to a full frame camera, so getting an efs lens is not a problem. i have heard and read great things about both lenses, but dont know which one to save up for. i also want to save up for a macro lens later on this year too, or should i just get a 25mm extension tube for my 28-135?? so many decisions and so little money......lol


thanks for ay help


james

[Sheiky]

I've got the 70-200 f4L usm as well and it goes along very well with my new 17-55 f2.8 is usm. I had the budget problem as well :D And now I'm really pleased with what I bought. The combination of lenses forfills a lot of demands. And the quality is just perfect. The 17-55 doesn't let you down, it really delivers L-quality in my opinion.


Next to those two lenses I've got thw 100mm macro f2.8 usm. And those three together really rule!





But then again, a 10-22 is really a great lens, but considering the price and the amount of usage...I don't think it's worth almost the same as an 17-55. Think about how often you will probably use that lens. Is it worth it? I can't recommend the 17-40, I had to choose between the 17-55 and the 17-40 last fall, but I chose the 17-55, I will try to find my topic on that, maybe it helps you a little!





More later [:D]





http://community.the-digital-picture.com/forums/p/2430/18910.aspx#18910 ("/forums/p/2430/18910.aspx#18910)





By the way, yes I know you've got the 18-55 and the 28-135 already, I assumed you'd sell them for the other lens. Correct me if I was wrong [:P]

[lynx0069]

thanks for that info....i didnt even consider the 18-55 f2.8.....i'll definatly rest your string about it and keep it in mind. more decisions....lol

[lynx0069]

oops.....meant to type 17-55 and i'll definatly sell my 18-55 kit lens, may be lucky and get $100 for it.........not sure about the 28-135 lens, i kinda like that lens

[Sheiky]

Haha yes it's a hard decision! Kept me awake for some days [:P]


I know the 28-135 is a good lens, but I think you'll be really happy with the image quality from the 17-55. Maybe you could try it somewhere?


If you don't mind switching lenses and get the best image quality in the entire focal area, just sell the 28-135...


When you go hinking or something you plan what lens you think you're gonna use and attach that to your camera. You can always switch lenses when you need to.


Maybe you could even save a little towards a 100mm f2.8 macro as well when you sell your 28-135 [:D]

[Sheiky]

By the way, take a look at the mouseover picture in the 17-55 f2.8 is usm review from bryan. It shows what a lot better the 17-55 is :D Even at f2.8 it totally defeats the 18-55 at f5.6!!




(http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-S-17-55mm-f-2.8-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx]http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-S-17-55mm-f-2.8-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx[/url]





You could also take a look at the tamron 17-50 f2.8 It's a lot cheaper then the canon, but it lacks IS and USM, but it's personal if you need it or not....





or maybe even better:


the canon 15-85 is... little more wideangleand reach then the 17-55, but no f2.8, no USM...





LOL I believe your choice is getting harder and harder [:D]


[URL="javascript:void(0))

[neuroanatomist]

I also strongly recommend the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM lens. But, you might also consider theEF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM (or even the less expensive 17-85mm it replaced) - a little more reach than the 17-55mm, while maintaining pretty good image quality. The trade off is aperture - if you find yourself without enough light (e.g. shooting indoors without flash) for the kit lens and/or 28-135mm, you'll have the same problem with the 15-85mm. The constant f/2.8 on the 17-55mm is much better with ambient light indoors.

[NFLD Stephen]

I just got the 15-85 and so far am really pleased with it. I love that the wide end is 15; doesn't sound like much difference from 17, but is is almost 6 degrees wider angle of view. (FYI Bryan's lens spec page shows the angle of view for most lenses.)


I had the same decision between the 15-85 and the 17-55. I liked the wider appeture of the 17-55, but the larger focal range of the 15-85, especially at the wide end. I understand the IQ for both lenses is similar, but I don't have the 17-55 to compare.


I paired my 15-85 with the 70-200IS and this is a fantastic combination: very versitile. I also have the 100 2.8 macro (non-usm) and love this lens: a lot of interesting pictures can be taken with macros.


IMO if you are deciding between these two lenses, I guess your decision basically comes down to whether you want the faster 2.8 appeture or the larger focal length of the 15-85. This depends largly on the type of shooting you do. With your current lenses, do you find that you are always shooting at the extreme focal lengths and wishing for "just a little bit more"? Or do you find yourself wishing for a wider appeture so you can shoot handheld in lower light? Answering these questions will help you determine which of these is better for YOU.


Stephen

[Brendan7]

lynx,


I would go with the 17-55 or the 17-40L.


If you don't mind non-L quality, get the 10-22, as it will not overlap with your 28-135, which you said you really like. Ideally, you could get a 10-22 and 24-105, but if the 28-135 if fine for you, then great! I do not know anyone who dislikes their 17-55. If that lens is too much $$$, then get the 17-40 or 10-22/


hope this helps. (HTH)


Brendan[H]

[gunslinge]

I love wide angle shots, also being able to walk in front of
everyone else and get an unobstructed picture of the subject, and for
me 17MM is minimum for wide angle, go to a store if you are lucky
enough to have one close, and try the canon 10-22, Tokina 12-24 ( the
lens I got ) and the Canon 15-85, and see if you like a prospective
wider than 17mm ( 28mm on film or FF ) .





Pictures from Sturgis 2009, one from the front ( really pic of red bike ) and one from the back side - no people- too many people distract from the subject


Canon 50d, Tokina 12-24 at 13mm





/resized-image.ashx/__size/600x400/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.23.92/bike-no-people.jpg








/resized-image.ashx/__size/600x400/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.23.92/bike_2D00_people.jpg

[lynx0069]

wow........thanks for all the input guys. looks like its pretty universal that you all really like the 17-55 f/2.8 IS. i think i'll try and save up for that one......even though it is $1200 here in canada, and thats with the canon rebate right now. maybe i'll luck out and find one used


james

[Sheiky]

Yes it's one great lens, I try to post a picture here so you can value it's sharpness and colors. Wait for it :P


Used ones are not to hard to find. It's a more expensive lens so there aren't a lot of people looking for it. And a lot of people selling these lenses are people that got a full frame camera and had to sell the ef-s lens, so they often are in very very good condition, so 2nd hand is a real good option to go for in this case.Most of the times it's really a lot cheaper. You might even get to buy one within the 1 year canon guarantee and a lot cheaper! Always try them out though...


And you could sell your 18-55 and your 28-135, maybe that will get you closer.


Still try to try the lens out somewhere, that gives you the best idea of handling and other personal things.


Good luck mate! I'm sure you will like whatever decision you will make

[Daniel Browning]

the 28-135 is the lens that i keep on my rebel about 80% of the time, its a good walk around lens,but i miss having the wide angle


I suggest the new EF-S 15-85. You will lose some telephoto reach, but nothing that isn't already covered by your 70-200 (with some nice overlap, even). You will gain wide angle capability (wider even than your 18-55), and it will completely replace your 18-55 and 28-135 so you can sell them if you want. Best of all, the quality will be much better than the 28-135, which I think you will really notice in your photos.


Normally I would suggest something like the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 or a few primes even, but since you are mostly happy with the 28-135, I think the 15-85 will be a better fit for you.


28-135 compared with 15-85 at 35mm ("http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=116&Camera=474&Sample=0&FLIComp=2& APIComp=0&LensComp=675&CameraComp=474&SampleComp=0 &FLI=1&API=1)


28-135 compared with 15-85 at 85mm ("http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=116&Camera=474&Sample=0&FLI=4&API= 1&LensComp=675&CameraComp=474&SampleComp=0&FLIComp =5&APIComp=0)

[musickna]

I've had the 10-22mm wide angle for about 4 years now, and have been consistently pleased with the results. I think it would round out the wide end of your range very nicely.


It was the third lens I bought for my Rebel XT (excluding the poor 18-55mm kit lens of the time). I'd also got the 70-200 f/4 L, but for the midrange I'd picked up the cheap but pretty good for the price Canon EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM ("http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-28-105mm-f-3.5-4.5-II-USM-Lens-Review.aspx) lens.


Almost immediately, I noticed that the quality of my mid-range shots from the 28-105mm, my usual walk-around lens, was lacking something compared with those from the 10-22mm and the 70-200mm. I suspect that, if you go for either the 10-22mm or the 17-40mm L, you are going to get the same reaction with your 28-135mm zoom.


So I think Daniel Browning's suggestion of the new 15-85mm is a very good one. You'll get pretty wide shots at the low end, a nice upper range overlap with your 70-200mm and your midrange shots should be significantly finer. It's what I would do today under your circumstances.